Liberty Dollar may have some competition...from VIRGINIA

[GoldandSilverEagles]

The 20-year veteran plans to introduce legislation during the Jan. 12 session of the General Assembly that would call for the Commonwealth to study minting its own coins in order to compete with what he calls “the monopoly of the Federal Reserve System.”

“We can’t mint money, but we can mint gold and silver coins,” Marshall said Wednesday night. “It sounds like a small difference, but it is a difference legally."

I find it interesting that those who profess to be most interested in the Constitution don't seem to be able to remember what it says, or what it means.

And I also find it interesting that those who are not lawyers so often want to talk about what constitutions and laws mean "legally."

Anyway, what the Constitution actually says is that no state shall "coin Money."

Assuming that there is a "difference legally" between a state that does "coin Money" and a state that does "mint gold and silver coins," how can that difference possibly allow the state "to compete with what he calls 'the monopoly of the Federal Reserve System'" if the "minted coins" are not "Money"?

Inquiring Minds(r) want to know.

Thank you LPC you saved me a*lot of typing.

If any State wants to use gold and silver coins, they should us "GoldandSilverEagles" (!couldn't resist! lol) legal tender available through the US Mint.

[Pottapaug1938]

The 20-year veteran plans to introduce legislation during the Jan. 12 session of the General Assembly that would call for the Commonwealth to study minting its own coins in order to compete with what he calls “the monopoly of the Federal Reserve System.”

“We can’t mint money, but we can mint gold and silver coins,” Marshall said Wednesday night. “It sounds like a small difference, but it is a difference legally."

I find it interesting that those who profess to be most interested in the Constitution don't seem to be able to remember what it says, or what it means.

And I also find it interesting that those who are not lawyers so often want to talk about what constitutions and laws mean "legally."

Anyway, what the Constitution actually says is that no state shall "coin Money."

Assuming that there is a "difference legally" between a state that does "coin Money" and a state that does "mint gold and silver coins," how can that difference possibly allow the state "to compete with what he calls 'the monopoly of the Federal Reserve System'" if the "minted coins" are not "Money"?

Inquiring Minds(r) want to know.

Thank you LPC you saved me a*lot of typing.

If any State wants to use gold and silver coins, they should us "GoldandSilverEagles" (!couldn't resist! lol) legal tender available through the US Mint.

OK, Gold Boy -- if I pass through Virginia, and I meet you and sell you something, I will be delighted to accept payment is Silver Eagles (face value $1, and legal tender for that amount) and Gold Eagles (face value $50, and legal tender for that amount).

Oh -- you want your Eagles valued at their bullion content? Sorry -- they are NOT legal tender for those amounts....

[GoldandSilverEagles]

OK, Gold Boy -- if I pass through Virginia, and I meet you and sell you something, I will be delighted to accept payment is Silver Eagles (face value $1, and legal tender for that amount) and Gold Eagles (face value $50, and legal tender for that amount).

Oh -- you want your Eagles valued at their bullion content? Sorry -- they are NOT legal tender for those amounts....

If you follow the proposed legislation of the "Legal Tender Act" it makes / acknowledges market adjustments in light of the face value of gold and silver Eagles for the payment of debts payable to the State.

Give me time and I'll educate the bunch of you on how the fed reserve has royally SCREWED UP your concept / understanding of the REAL (and I'll add, Constitutional) value of the "dollar".

[LPC]

If any State wants to use gold and silver coins, they should us "GoldandSilverEagles" (!couldn't resist! lol) legal tender available through the US Mint.

I'd like to buy a verb for that sentence.

[GoldandSilverEagles]

If any State wants to use gold and silver coins, they should us "GoldandSilverEagles" (!couldn't resist! lol) legal tender available through the US Mint.

I'd like to buy a verb for that sentence.

Foreign or Domestic?

[notorial dissent]

If you follow the proposed legislation of the "Legal Tender Act" it makes / acknowledges market adjustments in light of the face value of gold and silver Eagles for the payment of debts payable to the State.

Give me time and I'll educate the bunch of you on how the fed reserve has royally SCREWED UP your concept / understanding of the REAL (and I'll add, Constitutional) value of the "dollar".

There is no REAL or Constitutional value of the dollar. In fact, no where in the constitution is the term every used. The dollar is a construct used for accounting. We use the dollar, the Brits use the Pound Sterling. The value of the dollar is and always has been whatever Congress happens to say it is at the current time, and that value has changed repeatedly over time, it is no more a fixed value than the value of precious metal which changes all the time.

Don't bother trying to explain the act, there are too many three or more syllable words in it for you to handle, you'll just hurt and embarrass yourself further.

You obviously haven't actually read that piece of drivel. I was going to say "or you'd realize it was a bigger pile of horse hockey than anything the loon from Texas ever proposed," but since you only barely understand the concept of legal tender this is going to be way over your head, so my comment would be a waste of time.

The only thing that so called legislation proposes is basically changing names of things, handing messing up the economy back to the Sec of Treas, and generally messing up the banking and monetary systems along the way. It changes nothing, and my feeling is that it would just make things far worse than they are now.

As a side note, the way the legislation is written shows a serious lack of understanding of how the FED is constituted and what its legal standing is, and let’s not even start on economics.

[fortinbras]

There is no REAL or Constitutional value of the dollar. In fact, no where in the constitution is the term every used. The dollar is a construct used for accounting.

Actually, the dollar is mentioned in the 7th Amendment, "In suits at common law,where the value in controversy shall exceed $20 ...."

The sov'runs (and the militia before them) were fascinated with the Coinage Act of 1792, that specified the gold and silver ingredient of various coins. And they claimed these measurements had never changed. In fact, they had, both for silver and gold, been changed several times.

But in the last century this system of species coins ceased. One reason was the fluctuating market value of the ingredient, which exerted more influence on its value than the Constitution intended. Other reasons included the fact that the US had faded as a major producer of either gold or silver, and other countries (such as Russia) were far more productive. And the wealth of the USA was best represented in resources other than gold or silver.

[notorial dissent]

Point granted, I was referring to the original document, and even though 7 says $20, no where in the document is the term dollar otherwise used or defined.

So, totally off topic, and as an academic question, if we go to a different currency unit, say the double quatloo, does that invalidate the 7th. I have always been a bit puzzled by this particular amendment and why they chose that particular amount, although I realize that $20 at the time was a fair amount, I can’t find my conversion chart that tells me how much, but it always seemed an odd sum.

Now back on point. Agreed, the Sovraloonies seem to be fixated on the 1792 act the same way our resident loony is fixated on the postage act, like they were permanently engraved in stone or something and could never change, when as you point out they have changed innumerable times over the year, and will continue to change as conditions change.

The other problem with specie coins is the flat out lack of sufficient precious metal to meet the economy, and who wants to lug a ton of coins around with you to buy groceries.

[Pottapaug1938]

OK, Gold Boy -- if I pass through Virginia, and I meet you and sell you something, I will be delighted to accept payment is Silver Eagles (face value $1, and legal tender for that amount) and Gold Eagles (face value $50, and legal tender for that amount).

Oh -- you want your Eagles valued at their bullion content? Sorry -- they are NOT legal tender for those amounts....

If you follow the proposed legislation of the "Legal Tender Act" it makes / acknowledges market adjustments in light of the face value of gold and silver Eagles for the payment of debts payable to the State.

I can just see the fustercluck of arbitraging that will result if such a provision ever became law.

One thing that you can never quite understand is that our old system of gold coinage worked because the price of gold was fixed from the 1830s until almost 100 years later. Of course, you couldn't buy, in 1925, what you could buy with a $10 Eagle in 1845; but if you had an 1845 $10 Eagle in 1925 you could, if you wanted to, spend it and get no argument unless the coin was so worn that it contained too little gold to withstand the permitted tolerances. Of course, in many cases that coin stayed in a vault somewhere and a $10 Gold Certificate was issued against it, so that people didn't have their pockets weighed down with the things.

At any rate, you still haven't been able to evade the main point, here: the proposed Virginia Eagles are intended for use as money, and thus violate the U.S. Constition, the supreme law of the United States.

[Brandybuck]

Haven't you heard, Gov Spottswood imported an entire colony of miners from Germany to mine all the silver he was sure was in VA.

Funny thing that, I traced my family history all the way back to a family leaving Siegen Germany to go to Virginia to work under Governor Spottswood. The family history does not mention it, but Wikipedia shows that there was some religious strife going on in Siegenland at the time, which may have been a factor in leaving.

[notorial dissent]

At any rate, you still haven't been able to evade the main point, here: the proposed Virginia Eagles are intended for use as money, and thus violate the U.S. Constition, the supreme law of the United States.

Agreed, if they want to make the gold coins minted by the US legal tender for debts, I don't see any legal reason they couldn't, I don't know what they would have to do about the actual value since it is floating, and I think the bit about reserving the setting of the value of money to the Feds might just get in the way here of them doing that, so I can see all kinds of other problems cropping up. On the other hand, as you point out, minting their own, big NO NO!!!

[notorial dissent]

Haven't you heard, Gov Spottswood imported an entire colony of miners from Germany to mine all the silver he was sure was in VA.

Funny thing that, I traced my family history all the way back to a family leaving Siegen Germany to go to Virginia to work under Governor Spottswood. The family history does not mention it, but Wikipedia shows that there was some religious strife going on in Siegenland at the time, which may have been a factor in leaving.

I don't remember that being a major issue with the colonists, mostly it was that Spottswood had sent what was effectively a promoter over to Germany, don't know that I have ever seen a particular reason why they chose Siegen, but it was a mining and smelting area at the time. Most of the families that came over came from Trupbach and where from large families and wanted a chance to expand. Spottswood, or his agent, had promised them all free passage land in the new colony he was setting up. Spottswood wasn't really able to keep up his end of the bargain, and as near as I have been able to determine, I don't think they ever mined or processed so much as an ounce of silver, don't know that they ever even found any for that matter, but Spottswood had the silver fever and was convinced that it was there. They did do a little work with iron, but it never went anywhere and the foundry part of the colony never amounted to much. There are two area in Farquier where they settled.

[GoldandSilverEagles]

I can just see the fustercluck of arbitraging that will result if such a provision ever became law.

Yeh, and it'll put a damper on run away (aka wasteful) spending at the State level in a hurry! lol

One thing that you can never quite understand is that our old system of gold coinage worked because the price of gold was fixed from the 1830s until almost 100 years later. Of course, you couldn't buy, in 1925, what you could buy with a $10 Eagle in 1845; but if you had an 1845 $10 Eagle in 1925 you could, if you wanted to, spend it and get no argument unless the coin was so worn that it contained too little gold to withstand the permitted tolerances. Of course, in many cases that coin stayed in a vault somewhere and a $10 Gold Certificate was issued against it, so that people didn't have their pockets weighed down with the things.

No matter how you want to dissect the issue, the face value on the gold coin was a representative of the value of the "dollar" in the market place.

At any rate, you still haven't been able to evade the main point, here: the proposed Virginia Eagles are intended for use as money, and thus violate the U.S. Constition, the supreme law of the United States.

If you had bothered reading my comments to LPC's post in this thread, you would have seen that I am in agreement here. My point is that if Virginia wants to use gold and silver coins as "legal" tender in payment, the only "legal / lawful / Constitutional" choice they have is to use Gold and Silver Eagles available from the US Mint.

[Pottapaug1938]

I can just see the fustercluck of arbitraging that will result if such a provision ever became law.

Yeh, and it'll put a damper on run away (aka wasteful) spending at the State level in a hurry! lol

Don't drool when you "lol". I can't see how it will create ANY sort of damper on "wasteful spending"; but I CAN see how it will create a fustercluck of people trying to game the payments system.

One thing that you can never quite understand is that our old system of gold coinage worked because the price of gold was fixed from the 1830s until almost 100 years later. Of course, you couldn't buy, in 1925, what you could buy with a $10 Eagle in 1845; but if you had an 1845 $10 Eagle in 1925 you could, if you wanted to, spend it and get no argument unless the coin was so worn that it contained too little gold to withstand the permitted tolerances. Of course, in many cases that coin stayed in a vault somewhere and a $10 Gold Certificate was issued against it, so that people didn't have their pockets weighed down with the things.

No matter how you want to dissect the issue, the face value on the gold coin was a representative of the value of the "dollar" in the market place.

True; AS LONG AS the price of gold stayed stable. Once the price changed from $20.67 per ounce, that didn't apply. A $20 coin, after 1933, had a dollar value of just under $35.00. Similar issues confronted the Sovereign, the gold franc, and every other gold coinage in the world.

At any rate, you still haven't been able to evade the main point, here: the proposed Virginia Eagles are intended for use as money, and thus violate the U.S. Constitution, the supreme law of the United States.

If you had bothered reading my comments to LPC's post in this thread, you would have seen that I am in agreement here. My point is that if Virginia wants to use gold and silver coins as "legal" tender in payment, the only "legal / lawful / Constitutional" choice they have is to use Gold and Silver Eagles available from the US Mint.

If YOU had bothered reading MY previous comments, you would have seen that a one ounce silver American Eagle is legal tender for only $1; and its gold counterpart is legal tender for $50. Try to value it, in commerce, for anything else, and it is NOT legal tender for that amount. It becomes an item of barter, with no legal difference from, say,a shotgun, a beaver pelt or a Harmon Killebrew game-used baseball bat. These bullion pieces are legal tender ONLY because having a legal tender status makes them coins and not bullion, in a strict legal sense; and that's the ONLY reason that they are legal tender (that was one of the differences from the bullion medals that they replaced). Canada's Maple Leaf coinage operates the same way; and so do those of other countries.

So, dance all you want; but the cold, hard, politically unpleasant fact is that neither the Virginia "coinage", nor the U.S. American Eagle pieces, will EVER circulate as money.

[GoldandSilverEagles]

a one ounce silver American Eagle is legal tender for only $1; and its gold counterpart is legal tender for $50.

EXACTLY!!

Try to value it, in commerce, for anything else, and it is NOT legal tender for that amount. It becomes an item of barter, with no legal difference from, say,a shotgun, a beaver pelt or a Harmon Killebrew game-used baseball bat. These bullion pieces are legal tender ONLY because having a legal tender status makes them coins and not bullion, in a strict legal sense; and that's the ONLY reason that they are legal tender (that was one of the differences from the bullion medals that they replaced). Canada's Maple Leaf coinage operates the same way; and so do those of other countries.

So, dance all you want; but the cold, hard, politically unpleasant fact is that neither the Virginia "coinage", nor the U.S. American Eagle pieces, will EVER circulate as money.

My point is this....Accding to the US Constitution, only Congress has the authority to coin money and regulate it's value, so when the US Mint crank$ out $ilver dollar$ with "ONE DOLLAR" on them, the value of those coins can be legally interpreted and taken for the true value of the "dollar", and not those frn's that everyone trades as "dollars".

When one buys (trades, barters, whatever words you wish to use to dress up the transaction) say a small bag of groceries from a mom and pop grocery store for a silver dollar, those groceries are valued @ one dollar, the amt tendered. The problem is that "we the ppl" have been brainwashed into believing that whatever a frn denominated as "ONE DOLLAR" will buy is one dollars' worth of whatever! That's BS!

[Nikki]

What GASeBags fails to realize is the extremely short amount of time 'face valued' silver or gold coins will last in circulation as currency.

The one ounce of silver and of gold in the coin is worth substantailly more than the face value of the coin. So, if someone were stupid enough to use one of each to purchase something for $51.00, whoever received the coins would immediately take $51 in FRNs out of his pocket, put them in the cash register, and run to the nearest coin dealer to sell the two coins for their value as metal -- today well in excess of $100.

Thus, the coins immediately go out of circulation and into the melting pot.

It doesn't matter if the government recalls all paper money and replaces it with metal -- the coins will be sold (for a substantial profit) for Euros, Yen, or any other available currency,

Also, GAStritis (and the other proponents of metal-backed currency such as the financial genius Dr. Paul) fail to take into consideration that the vast majority of US dollars exists other than as paper currency. Most of it is little electronic bits, bamks' ledger entries, or some other esoteric non-currency medium.

For example, I received a letter today informing me that several thousand dollars had just been deposited into my checking account as compensation for my work for the last two weeks. Did my employer actually send a stack of FRNs to my bank? NOT

GAS&E, Ron Paul, and all the other "End the FED and return to hard money" morons can blather all that they wish, but all they will accomplish is increasing entropy.

Hard currencies, except as collectors' items or bullion, are gone -- never to reappear anywhere. The global economy has long since outgrown them and they have long since become obsolete in terms of supporting a flexible and growing global economy.

However, none of the above will prevent the "gold now" and "end the FED" lunatics from spouting their authentic 18th century economic blather.

[GoldandSilverEagles]

Nikki, your just upset because many months ago I called you an irs agent.

Btw, it doesnt take much intelligence or effort to label someone a moron. lol

Historically many ppl have been labeled morons (etc..) by ppl who weren't very intelligent.

Now I shall move on to more intelligent posts.

[LPC]

What GASeBags fails to realize is the extremely short amount of time 'face valued' silver or gold coins will last in circulation as currency.

The one ounce of silver and of gold in the coin is worth substantailly more than the face value of the coin. So, if someone were stupid enough to use one of each to purchase something for $51.00, whoever received the coins would immediately take $51 in FRNs out of his pocket, put them in the cash register, and run to the nearest coin dealer to sell the two coins for their value as metal -- today well in excess of $100.

Thus, the coins immediately go out of circulation and into the melting pot.

In other words, "Bad money drives out good", aka "Gresham's law," which has been known since the 1500s.

[Pottapaug1938]

a one ounce silver American Eagle is legal tender for only $1; and its gold counterpart is legal tender for $50.

EXACTLY!!

Try to value it, in commerce, for anything else, and it is NOT legal tender for that amount. It becomes an item of barter, with no legal difference from, say,a shotgun, a beaver pelt or a Harmon Killebrew game-used baseball bat. These bullion pieces are legal tender ONLY because having a legal tender status makes them coins and not bullion, in a strict legal sense; and that's the ONLY reason that they are legal tender (that was one of the differences from the bullion medals that they replaced). Canada's Maple Leaf coinage operates the same way; and so do those of other countries.

So, dance all you want; but the cold, hard, politically unpleasant fact is that neither the Virginia "coinage", nor the U.S. American Eagle pieces, will EVER circulate as money.

My point is this....Accding to the US Constitution, only Congress has the authority to coin money and regulate it's value, so when the US Mint crank$ out $ilver dollar$ with "ONE DOLLAR" on them, the value of those coins can be legally interpreted and taken for the true value of the "dollar", and not those frn's that everyone trades as "dollars".

When one buys (trades, barters, whatever words you wish to use to dress up the transaction) say a small bag of groceries from a mom and pop grocery store for a silver dollar, those groceries are valued @ one dollar, the amt tendered. The problem is that "we the ppl" have been brainwashed into believing that whatever a frn denominated as "ONE DOLLAR" will buy is one dollars' worth of whatever! That's BS!

No -- what YOU are saying is BS. If the U.S. mint issues a one ounce silver coin with a face value of one dollar on it, then it can only be exchanged for one other dollar -- i.e., a FRN, or the equivalent in coins; or it can legally be exchanged for good to the value of the same sort of dollar. Despite your most fervent wishes, there is NO other dollar; and if you walk into a grocery store, buy some groceries, and tender your silver dollar in payment, the grocer will accept it and thank you for your patronage; and after you leave he will have a good laugh about the idiot who paid for groceries worth $1 with a silver dollar worth many times that amount. He will sell your silver dollar, and add the profit gained to his ledger. If you should demand change, knowing that there is a vast difference between the face value of your silver dollar and its bullion value, the grocer will refuse, and have the law to back him up -- because all that you have legally given him is one dollar. The FRN, despite your most fervent wishes, is a dollar -- the only dollar -- because under the authority conferred by the Constitution, Congress has said so.

Game, set, match.

[Nikki]

Nikki, your just upset because many months ago I called you an irs agent.

Btw, it doesnt take much intelligence or effort to label someone a moron. lol

Historically many ppl have been labeled morons (etc..) by ppl who weren't very intelligent.

Now I shall move on to more intelligent posts.

I'm not the least bit upset by anything you might have said -- especially because I am not an IRS agent of any type.

As to calling someone a moron, I was referring to people who lack the courage to do the least bit of research regarding the hot-air theories they espouse and attempt to propogate.

As to intelligent posts, how about if you address any of the points I raised and refute any of them? Or would you prefer to just blather from a basis of unsupported ignorance?